William Neil Adger’s research while affiliated with University of Exeter and other places

As global climate change intensifies, the question of what makes a place habitable or uninhabitable is critical, particularly in the context of a potential future climate outside the realm of lived experience, and the possible concurrent redistribution of populations partly associated with such climatic shifts. The concept of habitability holds the potential for advancing the understanding of the societal consequences of climate change, as well as for integrating systemic understandings and rights-based approaches. However, most ways of analyzing habitability have shortcomings in terms of in-depth integration of socio-cultural aspects and human agency in shaping habitability, in failing to address spatial inequalities and power dynamics, and in an underemphasis of the connectedness of places. Here we elaborate habitability as an emergent property of the relations between people and a given place that results from people’s interactions with the material and immaterial properties of a place. From this, we identify four axes that are necessary to go beyond environmental changes, and to encompass socio-cultural, economic, and political dynamics: First the processes that influence habitability require a systemic approach, viewing habitability as an outcome of ecological, economic, and political processes. Second, the role of socio-cultural dimensions of habitability requires special consideration, given their own operational logics and functioning of social systems. Third, habitability is not the same for everyone, thus a comprehensive understanding of habitability requires an intersectionally differentiated view on social inequalities. Forth, the influence of external factors necessitates a spatially relational perspective on places in the context of their connections to distant places across scales. We identify key principles that should guide an equitable and responsible research agenda on habitability. Analysis should be based on disciplinary and methodological pluralism and the inclusion of local perspectives. Habitability action should integrate local perspectives with measures that go beyond purely subjective assessments. And habitability should consider the role of powerful actors, while staying engaged with ethical questions of who defines and enacts the future of any given place.

To understand the implications of migration for sustainable development requires a comprehensive consideration of a range of population movements and their feedback across space and time. This Perspective reviews emerging science at the interface of migration studies, demography, and sustainability, focusing on consequences of migration flows for nature-society interactions including on societal outcomes such as inequality; environmental causes and consequences of involuntary displacement; and processes of cultural convergence in sustainability practices in dynamic new populations. We advance a framework that demonstrates how migration outcomes result in identifiable consequences on resources, environmental burdens and well-being, and on innovation, adaptation, and challenges for sustainability governance. We elaborate the research frontiers of migration for sustainability science, explicitly integrating the full spectrum of regular migration decisions dominated by economic motives through to involuntary displacement due to social or environmental stresses. Migration can potentially contribute to sustainability transitions when it enhances well-being while not exacerbating structural inequalities or compound uneven burdens on environmental resources.

Climate change and economic growth are having a profound influence on the integrity of socio-economics and ecology of coastal Bangladesh. In the extreme, there are widespread expectations of inundation and coastal abandonment. However, results from our integrated assessment model (IAM) show that over the next 30 years, development choices might have a stronger influence on livelihoods and economic wellbeing than climate driven environmental change. The IAM simulates the economic development of rural areas by coupling physical models (driven by expectations of climate change) with economic models (informed by a series of policy decisions). This is done using substantial primary, secondary and stakeholder-derived biophysical and socio-economic datasets, together with shocks such as cyclones. The study analyses the future socio-ecological sensitivity to climate change and policy decisions and finds that well managed development is as important as adaptation to mitigate risks, reduce poverty and raise aggregate well-being. This analysis enables decision makers to identify appropriate development pathways that address current social-ecological vulnerability and develop a more resilient future to 2050 and beyond. These policy actions are complementary to climate adaptation and mitigation. Our IAM framework provides a valuable evidence-based tool to support sustainable coastal development and is transferable to other vulnerable delta regions and other coastal lowlands around the world.

The role of migration as one potential adaptation to climate change is increasingly recognized, but little is known about whether migration constitutes successful adaptation, under what conditions, and for whom. Based on a review of emerging migration science, we propose that migration is a successful adaptation to climate change if it increases well-being, reduces inequality, and promotes sustainability. Well-being, equity, and sustainability represent entry points for identifying trade-offs within and across different social and temporal scales that could potentially undermine the success of migration as adaptation. We show that assessment of success at various scales requires the incorporation of consequences such as loss of population in migration source areas, climate risk in migration destination, and material and non-material flows and economic synergies between source and destination. These dynamics and evaluation criteria can help make migration visible and tractable to policy as an effective adaptation option.

Research on the impacts of COVID-19 on mobility has focused primarily on the increased health vulnerabilities of involuntary migrant and displaced populations. But virtually all migration flows have been truncated and altered because of reduced economic and mobility opportunities of migrants. Here we use a well-established framework of migration decision-making, whereby individual decisions combine the aspiration and ability to migrate, to explain how public responses to the COVID-19 pandemic alter migration patterns among urban populations across the world. The principal responses to COVID-19 pandemic that affected migration are: 1) through travel restrictions and border closures, 2) by affecting abilities to move through economic and other means, and 3) by affecting aspirations to move. Using in-depth qualitative data collected in six cities in four continents (Accra, Amsterdam, Brussels, Dhaka, Maputo, and Worcester), we explore how populations with diverse levels of education and occupations were affected in their current and future mobility decisions. We use data from interviews with sample of internal and international migrants and non-migrants during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic outbreak to identify the mechanisms through which the pandemic affected their mobility decisions. The results show common processes across the different geographical contexts: individuals perceived increased risks associated with further migration, which affected their migration aspirations, and had reduced abilities to migrate, all of which affected their migration decision-making processes. The results also reveal stark differences in perceived and experienced migration decision-making across precarious migrant groups compared to high-skilled and formally employed international migrants in all settings. This precarity of place is particularly evident in low-income marginalised populations.

Energy consumption in the residential sector is increasing rapidly in China. This study applies an integrated assessment model to investigate the adverse impacts of household energy consumption by various fuel types across rural and urban areas on age- and sex- specific premature deaths associated with PM2.5 pollution at provincial levels for 2015. We further estimate the economic and health co-benefits of a switch from solid fuels to electricity within households. We find that energy consumed by Chinese urban households was nearly 1.8 times than that of rural households. However, premature deaths due to household energy usage was 1.1 times higher in rural areas compared to urban areas due to direct use of coal for heating in rural households. The majority of household consumption-related premature deaths are predominately in the Southern area of China due to the population size and aging population. By replacing coal and biomass with electricity, this paper estimates economic benefits equal to 0.09% (95% CI: 0.08%-0.1%) GDP for rural areas and 0.006% (0.005%-0.007%) of GDP for urban areas of China. The results suggest that mitigation measures such as the promotion and subsidization of cleaner fuels, modern stove within rural households would yield these potential significant economic benefits.

Adaptation to climate change is inescapably influenced by processes of social identity – how people perceive themselves, others, and their place in the world around them. Yet there is sparse evidence into the specific ways in which identity processes shape adaptation planning and responses. This paper proposes three key ways to understand the relationship between identity formation and adaptation processes: 1) how social identities change in response to perceived climate change risks and threats; 2) how identity change may be an objective of adaptation; and 3) how identity issues can constrain or enable adaptive action. It examines these three areas of focus through a synthesis of evidence on community responses to flooding and subsequent policy responses in Somerset county, UK and the Gippsland East region in Australia, based on indepth longitudinal data collected among those experiencing and enacting adaptation. The results show that adaptation policies are more likely to be effective when they give individuals confidence in the continuity of their in-groups, enhance the self-esteem of these groups, and develop their sense of self-efficacy. These processes of identity formation and evolution are therefore central to individual and collective responses to climate risks.

Decisions about climate change are inherently moral. They require making moral judgements about important values and the desired state of the present and future world. Hence there are potential benefits in explaining climate action by integrating well-established and emerging knowledge on the role of morality in decision-making. Insights from the social and behavioural sciences can help ground climate change decisions in empirical understandings of how moral values and worldviews manifest in people and societies. Here, we provide an overview of progress in research on morals in the behavioural and social sciences, with an emphasis on empirical research. We highlight the role morals play in motivating and framing climate decisions; outline work describing morals as relational, situated, and dynamic; and review how uneven power dynamics between people and groups with multiple moralities shape climate decision-making. Effective and fair climate decisions require practical understandings of how morality manifests to shape decisions and action. To this end, we aim to better connect insights from social and behavioural scholarship on morality with real-world climate change decision-making.

Mobility is a key livelihood and risk management strategy, including in the context of climate change. The COVID-19 pandemic has reinforced long standing concerns that migrant populations remain largely overlooked in economic development, adaptation to climate change, and spatial planning. We synthesize evidence across multiple studies that confirms the overwhelming preponderance of in-country and short distance rather than international migration in climate change hotspots in Asia and Africa. The emerging findings highlight the critical importance of addressing immobility and the intersecting social determinants that influence who can move and who cannot in development policy. This evidence suggests a more focused climate mobilities research agenda that includes understanding multiple drivers of mobility and multi-directional movement; intersecting social factors that determine mobility for some and immobility for others; and the implications for mobility and immobility under climate change and the COVID-19 recovery.